It's horribly offensive that the KKK gets police escorts to hold rallies on taxpayer dime, but you can't sell a fictional doll based on a very popular movie. That's the exact opposite intent of the first amendment. It's supposed to be freedom of speech, not freedom of speech only.

It's horribly offensive that the KKK gets police escorts to hold rallies on taxpayer dime, but you can't sell a fictional doll based on a very popular movie. That's the exact opposite intent of the first amendment. It's supposed to be freedom of speech, not freedom of speech only.

Lighten up, Frances. The government didn't order the toys removed from shelves. The people selling them made their own choice.

It's horribly offensive that the KKK gets police escorts to hold rallies on taxpayer dime, but you can't sell a fictional doll based on a very popular movie. That's the exact opposite intent of the first amendment. It's supposed to be freedom of speech, not freedom of speech only.

This has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment. What I should have seen coming were people like Sharpton or Spike Lee biatching to the point where the company said fark it and took them off the shelves, increasing their value.

While my feelings are a bit split regarding the productions of these figures, IMHO they are a niche product. These usually aren't the type of thing you find in Toys'R'Us. They are usually a pricey, small scale production targeted at movie and figure collectors. They aren't for kids to play "Slave and Master", they'll sit in their boxes on a shelf next to a movie poster or something.

It's horribly offensive that the KKK gets police escorts to hold rallies on taxpayer dime, but you can't sell a fictional doll based on a very popular movie. That's the exact opposite intent of the first amendment. It's supposed to be freedom of speech, not freedom of speech only.

vrax:While my feelings are a bit split regarding the productions of these figures, IMHO they are a niche product. These usually aren't the type of thing you find in Toys'R'Us. They are usually a pricey, small scale production targeted at movie and figure collectors. They aren't for kids to play "Slave and Master", they'll sit in their boxes on a shelf next to a movie poster or something.

Yeah they're definitely not meant for kids but kids will get them. Still there's nothing that glorifies slavery inherent in the product and the movie is very clear that Tarantino sees slavery as a horrible dehumanizing capital offense. Any kid who thinks slavery is something to make light of after this product probably thought it before. Django is arguably not the best role model I guess.

However I can understand being uncomfortable with selling a slave doll and making a profit off of that sale by mostly white people but probably a lot of different people. Profiting off the idea and the suffering. An idea that's still fresh and not entirely dead in the world.

But it's also something that should be talked about and commented on, especially since it still exists today.

Well, considering that NECA announced months ago that these were only going to be a one-time limited run (and NECA's idea of a wide run is pretty much every other toymaker's idea of a limited run, soooooo...) and they've been sold out for months, it was probably pretty easy for the Weinsteins to say, "No more."

fusillade762:Playing Master and Slave is SO much cooler than Cowboys and Indians.

It's sooooooooooo 50 shades of a slippery slope. You might get a sparkly figurine with a nimbus 2000 broomstick stuck up its ass and a kung-fu grip, with a Malibu beach party accessory kit you have to purchase separately, while saving up for the ball gag and shogun katana rescue kit and then have to use your ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Im ~~~~~~~~aaaaaaaaaaa~~~~~~~~gin~~ a~~shun~~~~~~

It's horribly offensive that the KKK gets police escorts to hold rallies on taxpayer dime, but you can't sell a fictional doll based on a very popular movie. That's the exact opposite intent of the first amendment. It's supposed to be freedom of speech, not freedom of speech only.

Democrats only support the BOR's when they're the ones cashing in on it.

It's horribly offensive that the KKK gets police escorts to hold rallies on taxpayer dime, but you can't sell a fictional doll based on a very popular movie. That's the exact opposite intent of the first amendment. It's supposed to be freedom of speech, not freedom of speech only.

Democrats only support the BOR's when they're the ones cashing in on it.

But we can count on that bastion of right-wing conservatism the ACLU to stand up for us!

Trolling politics in an action figure thread is really pathetic. Especially when you don't make any sense.